Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!slb-doll.CSNET!dietz
From: dietz@SLB-DOLL.CSNET (Paul Dietz)
Newsgroups: net.space
Subject: Plutonium
Message-ID: <8603110326.AA03483@s1-b.arpa>
Date: Mon, 10-Mar-86 21:26:24 EST
Article-I.D.: s1-b.8603110326.AA03483
Posted: Mon Mar 10 21:26:24 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 12-Mar-86 04:45:18 EST
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The ARPA Internet
Lines: 23

Some comments on Pu debate:

(1) The accident that might cause release of plutonium is an explosion
on the pad, or a malfunction in which the shuttle heels over and crashes
a few seconds after liftoff.  Unlike the 51-L explosion, the SRB's and
most of the fuel would explode.  The Pu would end up spread all over the
launch area, which would be decidedly unhealthy for future launch activities.

(2) The Pu in the thermoelectric generators is Pu-238.  It has a
half-life of around 87 years; pound for pound it is about 260 times more
radioactive than Pu-239, and more than an order of magnitude more
radioactive than radium (for alpha particles; it does not emit much gamma
radiation).  I'm not sure how much more radioactive it is than bomb debris,
since fallout contains a mixture of trans-uranium isotopes.  The same
is true for reactor plutonium.

(3) The fuel in the thermoelectric generators is in the oxide form, so
the chemical toxicity of Pu metal is not relevant.

An interesting aside: ionization smoke detectors contain a small
quantity of americium (Am-241, I think), an alpha emitter like
plutonium.  How much americium has been distributed among american
households?